Our View: Memo to state regulators: First, do no harm

Yes, it’s the region’s biggest employer, but well over a hundred Pelican Bay State Prison employees have received layoff notices, and it’s still uncertain how the Fort Dick facility will be affected by budget cuts and possible early prisoner release.

Yes, most of our old-growth redwoods are preserved in state parks, but the governor has seen fit to propose closing those parks (and most others in California) despite their obvious positive impact on an otherwise struggling economy. It may be left up to the National Park Service and private organizations to prevent a redwood catastrophe.

Yes, it’s a substantial contributor to social service programs that provide lifelines to some Del Norte County residents, but many of those lifelines are being severed by Sacramento.

Meanwhile, even as we deal with the still-evolving consequences of budget cuts, the state government musters the energy to aggressively pursue new initiatives that may hamper Del Norte’s ability to live long and prosper.

Here are two examples:

These are conditions based on a projected rise in sea level due to global warming, and they have not yet been applied anywhere else in California. So instead of throwing us a bone and allowing one condo project whose developer, Randy Baugh, has already agreed to abide by the conditions, the Coastal Commission is saying the only way this can proceed is if the city agrees to be the guinea pig for a statewide experiment in further restrictions on coastal development.

“They’re kind of holding his project hostage,” said Mayor Kelly Schellong. She’s right. Rather than acquiesce by adopting additional citywide restrictions on coastal development — we already have conditions in place to account for tsunamis — the City Council should resubmit the proposal with phrasing that indicates the commission’s conditions apply only to the project in question.

In other words, reject the concept of land-use planning by extortion. Let’s look closely at the local lay of the land before adopting further development restrictions based on a projected rise in sea level worldwide.

• A process is under way that could overlay our already heavily restricted coastline with a new set of fishing restrictions through the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative.

We all want to preserve marine health, but this should not be a case of one-size-fits-all. It is not a given that still more fishing restrictions are needed on the North Coast.

We must be vigilant to ensure that any MLPA proposal is based on an accurate appraisal of our particular coastline and not protectionist zeal from the folks down south.